Undemocratic Regional Assembly for the chop - but what in it's place?

Some interesting correspondence regarding the membership of the South West Regional Assembly below - of course this Assembly is set to be abolished very soon - see consultation details below - but thought worth including here how this undemocratic Assembly works - basically excluding large sections of voters views - perhaps no wonder they can come up with a Regional Spatial Strategy that increases emissions over next 20 years instead of cutting them.

Photo: Randwick Woods

Anyway here first is how Assembly Members are currently identified:

Seventy percent of the Membership is drawn from the region's 51 Local Authorities. The remaining thirty percent of the Membership is drawn from sectors across the region. These Members are known as the Social, Economic and Environmental Partners (SEEPs). In addition, there are two National Park Members and two representatives of Local Councils (Parishes). Local Authority Members are identified in two ways.

First, each Local Authority nominates one Councillor to represent the Authority on the Assembly. These 51 Members are then 'topped up' from County and Unitary Authorities with additional nominations to ensure the Members from Local Authorities reflect the political makeup of the South West as a whole. These additional Local Authority Councillors are nominated by political groups in the South West in accordance with a formula agreed nationally by the Local Government Association and the political parties.

To answer your question, political parties are represented on the Assembly by Local Authority Members, and therefore, a Green Party Councillor would have to be nominated by the Local Authority on which they sit to serve as an Assembly Member. In addition to the Local Authority members, there are currently 36 Social, Economic and Environmental Partners (SEEPs) amounting to 30% of the total Membership of the Regional Assembly. They represent a number of sectoral interests of importance across the South West, which includes the Business and Economic Sector, Agriculture, Health, Environment, Trade Unions, Learning, Skills and Business, Voluntary and Community, Equalities, Youth, Faith Communities, Public Transport Users and Housing.

All aspects of SEEPs Membership is reviewed every four years. SEEPs are nominated by regional organisations from the sectors listed above. In order to qualify as a nominating body for the Assembly, an organisation must demonstrate that it has a regional remit, represents interests in economic, social and/or environmental development, and has clear processes in place for selecting its representatives to the Assembly. The term of any SEEP appointment is set by the nominating body and is usually between two and four years, though some require annual elections. Like all other Assembly Members, the SEEPs sign up to the Code of Conduct for Members and complete an annual register of interests. More information about the Regional Assembly and Assembly Members can be found on our website www.southwest-ra.gov.uk

Another question was posed by a Green:

"These 51 Members are then 'topped up' from County and Unitary Authorities with additional nominations to ensure the Members from Local Authorities reflect the political makeup of the South West as a whole". I take it that by "political make-up" you mean the political constitution of the various Local Authorities. Democracy is that system of government where ultimate power resides in the will of the people.

The people express their will in a vote. The electoral system then interprets that vote in a variety of ways. In the UK we have a particular electoral system called First Past the Post (FPTP) which results in a variance between the proportional vote expressed by the people and the resulting representation of elected members on the Local Authorities. In "topping up" to reflect the "political makeup" of the South West as a whole, the SWRHA is perpetuating the distortions arising from FPTP. It would be more democratic if the political allocation of the SWRHA were to reflect the votes cast in the South West, rather than the seats allocated.

Here was a response:

As officers, it is not for us to agree or disagree. The South West Chamber and the South West Planning Conference agreed the constitution for the Assembly when the two groups came together to form the Assembly in July 2000. The constitution under which we work includes details of how the Membership should be identified based on the Rallings and Thrasher model, which is also the method the National LGA employ. If you have any further questions, you may find the answers by looking at our Frequently Asked Questions: http://www.southwest-ra.gov.uk/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=61&tt=swra

And some more Green comment:

Thank you for the link to the FAQs. I read: "...the share of seats each party has in a local authority is calculated. For example, if in a 40 seat council, party A has 12 seats, party B has 15, and party C 13, the percentages would be 30%, 37.5%, and 32.5%. Each party is then said to represent that proportion of the authority's electorate, expressed in raw figures." This means that instead of taking the actual vote cast, which would respect the principle of democracy, the method used includes the distortion applied by the electoral system, which includes the notorious effects of the FPTP system.

Well fear not - the Government announced in July that Regional Assemblies will not exist in their current form after 2010 - therefore questions on the future of regional governance in the region, should be addressed to the consultation when it is launched by Government http://www.southwest-ra.gov.uk/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=3322

I have to say the proposal for Regional Development Agencies is equally worrying - again seem to be totally undemocratic.